IVV vs SMB
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs VanEck Short Muni ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | SMB | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.07% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $312M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 2.77% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 326 | |
| YTD Return | +13.51% | -1.09% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.65% | +0.25% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.94% | +2.86% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.95% | +0.77% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 20.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -29.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | VanEck | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Feb 22, 2008 |
IVV vs SMB Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and VanEck Short Muni ETF (SMB) is a ETF from VanEck. Over the past year IVV returned +20.65% while SMB returned +0.25%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.51% versus a loss of 1.09% for SMB.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.94% per year against +2.86% for SMB; over five years the annualized figures are +12.95% and +0.77% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.02% annualized vs +1.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SMB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.6% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.5% for IVV and -29.3% for SMB. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.01. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SMB charges 0.07%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $7 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 2.77% for SMB.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and SMB share 0 holdings out of 540 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SMB?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SMB charges 0.07%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $4 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or SMB?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.65% vs +0.25% for SMB, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +7.02% vs +1.86% for SMB. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SMB?
SMB has been the more volatile fund at 20.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SMB -29.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and SMB?
IVV and SMB have a monthly-return correlation of -0.01, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SMB?
IVV and SMB share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 540 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SMB?
IVV yields 1.10% while SMB yields 2.77%, so SMB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.